GMA: Internet Baby Broker Defends Herself

March 5, 2001 -- Kimberly and Belinda, awaiting their fate with a British foster family who wants to adopt them, may be the only ones who haven't heard Tina Johnson vilified.

From the moment the first international headlines ran: "Babies Sold Twice on the Internet," Johnson has been blamed as the baby broker who took money and handed over 6 month old twins not once, but twice.

But in an exclusive interview with Robin Roberts that appeared on Good Morning America, Johnson said that she is not in the business of selling babies.

"People need to have a better perception of adoption," Johnson said. "It's not about baby selling. It's about the services and the time that goes into it."

Though she understand from the public's point of view that it seems like babies are being brokered, people should understand that adoption is also a profession in which people expect to earn a living.

Work for Free?

"Adoption professionals that you could talk to, other facilitators, other agencies, other attorneys, they're all charging money but are they selling children? I mean, you know, they're charging money," Johnson said. "Nobody's in adoption working for free. I feel like people somehow expect that if you're working in adoption and you're working with children that you should just work for free."

Johnson says it's the children that are most important to her. The 34-year-old high school dropout started working in the world of private adoptions three years ago, after spending time volunteering with children.

Her main goal: to work with and place minority babies that are less sought after by adoptive parents.

Johnson's attorney, who was at her side during the interview with GMA, pointed out that Johnson is not in any legal trouble.

"Ms. Johnson, and she wanted everybody to know this, did not do anything illegal," said the attorney, Tony Capozzola. "Nor unethical and she's not at this point the subject of any investigation."

In Adoption, No Guarantees

Here's what we know. Both couples who were hoping to adopt the twins: Richard and Vickie Allen and Alan and Judith Kilshawsigned a contract with Johnson to present them to potential birth mothers.The fees were non-refundable, with no guarantee of an adoption.

A leading adoption attorney told Good Morning America that these contracts are normal and legal.When the birth mother, Tranda Wecker, decided to remove her babies from the Allen house,that too was legal, and in the murky world of private adoptions, not uncommon. What's more, Johnson is now glad Wecker made that choice.

Johnson said she has qualms about how straightforward the Allens have been.

"What I feel about the Allens is that there are are two sides to them and there's a side that the media sees and there's a whole other side to that has also been displayed," Johnson said.

"That seems like an easy way for her to address her behavior in the past," Richard Allen said in response.

In another odd twist to an already strange case, one of the would-be dads, Richard Allen, 49, of Highland, Calif. was arrested on child molestation charges. He has pleaded innocent to three counts of a lewd act with a child under the age of 14 and one count of indecent exposure. He was arrested last Wednesday after his son's babysitters, sisters who are ages 13 and 14, said he molested them last year and in 1999.

"I am not a child molester," Allen told Good Morning America.. "I don't know what else to say about that. I'm shocked, dismayed at this sort of thing happening to anyone."

Because of the charges, the Allens' two-year-old son was removed from their home by child protective services. And Richard Allen said that while he is unsure about whether he and his wife will continue their legal efforts to obtain the twins, he will do whatever it takes to get his son back.

"I don't want any rush to judgment, or any harm to come to my son," he said. "My son is my life."

No Reason Needed

Despite the Allens' troubles, Wecker didn't need any reason for taking the child away.Under California adoption law, the birth mother can take back her children, without explanation, within the first 90 days following the adoption.

"All adoptive parents understand there is a risk involved in adoption," Johnson said. "There's a risk that the birth mother may change her mind for whatever reason."

In this case the birth mother was the one that decided that she no longer wanted her babies with the Allens, and instead wanted them with the Kilshaws.

So, Johnson says the babies went to the Kilshaws, at the birth mother's request. The birth mother did not receive any part of Johnson's fees.

And that might have been the end of the story if the Kilshaws had not complained about excessive American adoption fees, in this case, $12,500.

"I want my money back, Tina," Judith Kilshaw said in an interview with GMA. "I want the explanations, Tina. I want the answers. Come clean with us and the Allens. State your points. State your reasons. And let's sort the matter out properly."

Johnson said that each party involved in adoption is charged differently.

"The reason the fees were different is because the fees are assessed on a case by case basis," Johnson said. "And, and of course that covers additional charges. All the long distance, all the other things. Well this was a couple that was an international family and so the fees were based on a lot of criteria."

Johnson Wants To Keep Working

Johnson works from her home, a half million dollar house in southern California. She told GMA that she has successfully facilitated almost 90 adoptions. Good Morning America randomly checked on eight of them, and found couples who had adopted babies with Johnson's help.

But there were also couples that say they gave Johnson thousands of dollars and have nothing to show for it. In fact, at least twice she's been forced to return money to couples, once by the Better Business Bureau, once from an out of court settlement.

We spoke to several independent adoption experts who agreed that, in this case at least, Johnson's actions were reasonable. In fact, the Allens told GMA that even after the twins were taken from their home, Johnson offered to arrange other adoptions.

But they refused. Still Johnson said she would like to continue in her line of work.

"That's still what I'd like to be doing," Johnson said. "But based on all of the media vilification that has gone on, no one, you know, it's not, I'm unable to continue with my work. So yet I have birth mothers right now and I don't have any adoptive parents. "

So who is the villain in this?

It may be a system that has almost no regulation. This weekend dozens of California facilitators whose business has been severely hurt by the twin's story, met to discuss the possibility of regulating their fees and services.

As for the twins, sources tell GMA that it is doubtful that either the Allens or the Kilshaws will ever get custody. A state court awarded custody to the birth father, but even that is in question.So for now, the twins remain in temporary foster care, in the United Kingdom.